We lost nothing.
You are wrong.
We established a precedent that things can be declared machine guns, which CLEARLY do not fit the federal definition of a machine gun, if they can help someone shoot semi auto at a faster rate.
Lightweight competition triggers, binary triggers and 30, 60, or 100 round magazines all do that too, and declaring them to be machine guns would be just as legally sound as declaring bumpstocks to be machine guns.
Trump opened Pandora’s box for the next dem president. We lost a very great deal on that ban, but most of the world still has its head rammed up its a** about the whole thing.
“Bump stocks are a
JOKE
We lost nothing.”
________________
Respectfully disagree.
I believe you (and many others) are missing an important point here.
I didn’t own a bumpstock and had no desire to own one; however, the BATFE gymnastics used to outlaw bumpstocks created a new standard which now effectively equates how fast a weapon can be fired (thru any means) with w/it being categorized as a MACHINEGUN. (Prior to this the BATFE standard required a specific type of mechanical configuration within a firearms trigger mechanism for it to be categorized as a machinegun.)
Think about that! As you pointed out, ANY semi-auto can be easily “jury-rigged” to fire as fast as a bumpstock and w/a little practice and the proper trigger technique this can be accomplished w/o any “jury-rigging.” What do you think this new BATFE precedent will lead to in the hands of an anti-gun president?
The fault here is not all President Trump’s alone, who is a good man IMHO, it is his policy advisors along w/his lack of a thorough understanding of the U.S. Constitution and the past history of our battle to save/reclaim our 2nd amendment.
Seemingly insignificant semantical changes in the law can lead to disastrous consequences when clever, unscrupulous, Leftist lawyers and judges become involved ...and they will.